Why did Axminster fail to get Town Fund grant? Because it’s in a safe Tory seat

“The Conservatives have been accused of short-changing the poorest communities in favour of comparatively affluent towns to boost their election prospects.

The government promised that the multibillion-pound towns fund would “unleash the full economic potential of more than 100 places and level up communities throughout the country”.

However, 32 towns on the list fall outside the 300 worst-off in England according to rankings from the Office for National Statistics.

Analysis by The Times reveals the extent to which money has been directed towards wealthier areas that are marginal Conservative-held or target seats.

Among the least deprived locations given priority are Stocksbridge in South Yorkshire, where Angela Smith, who won the seat for Labour in 2017, is standing aside after 14 years, and Loughborough, where the Conservatives are defending a majority of 4,000.

Others include Brighouse, Kidsgrove, Cheadle, Worcester and Crawley, which all sit in constituencies that returned Tory MPs with majorities of less than 5,000 at the 2017 election.

Newark, which is ranked 298th in terms of deprivation, is in the constituency being contested by Robert Jenrick, the housing secretary. The list also features Darwen, the Lancashire constituency that Jake Berry, the northern powerhouse minister, is defending.

Andrew Gwynne, the shadow communities secretary, said: “This raises serious questions about the role that ministers and advisers played in robbing some of the poorest towns in the country to funnel cash into Tory target seats in a scramble for votes.

“The towns fund is an insult to communities across the country that have been forced to bear the greatest burden of austerity.”

Will Jennings, professor of public policy and researcher for the Centre of Towns think tank, said more transparency was urgently needed to justify why some of these towns had been included while places such as Tipton, Bootle and Sheerness had not.

The towns fund has also been criticised for failing to fulfil promises made in the Conservatives’ 2017 manifesto, which pledged to replace £30 billion of structural fund money from the EU with a “United Kingdom shared prosperity fund, specifically designed to reduce inequalities between communities”.

Lisa Nandy, Labour’s candidate in Wigan, said: “We were promised real investment, including billions through a shared prosperity fund. Instead we’ve seen money pushed towards marginal towns during an election campaign.”

Analysis of the towns fund was carried out using Office for National Statistics data on income deprivation, one of the key measures ministers were asked to consider when finalising the recipients. This showed that more than half the 100 towns (55) voted Tory in 2017, yet more than three quarters (85) of the 10 per cent of most deprived towns backed Labour at the last election.

The data revealed that the 100 areas chosen to receive funds had an average parliamentary majority of just over 6,000. This compares with an average majority of almost 11,000 in England’s 10 per cent most deprived towns.

Towns Fund money is going to 23 towns with populations below 25,000, the most widely used classification of a small town. One, Tory-voting Millom, in Cumbria, has just 5,887 people.”

Source: Times (pay wall)

Business rates system broken say MPs

The business rates system is “broken” and needs to be reformed for the benefit of councils and businesses alike, according to a report from the treasury committee released today.

It revealed that the tax generated £31bn in the UK in the last financial year, with revenues rising faster than inflation.

MPs also found councils have applied business rates reliefs inconsistently and urged the government to create a “single comprehensive” guide on how they should operate.

The report acknowledged the government’s plan to increase councils’ retention of business rates from 50% to 75% – but this move, which was meant to start in April 2020, has already been pushed back by a year.

“Any reform of the system should have particular regard both to the need to maintain the total income for local authorities, and to keep the link between individual authorities and the current and potential new businesses in their areas,” it said.

Alison McGovern, Treasury committee’s lead member of the inquiry, said: “It’s abundantly clear that the current business rates system is broken. The tax represents an increasing burden on businesses, particularly those with a physical high street presence struggling to remain competitive.”

Commenting on previous attempts to improve the business rates system, she said: “Odd reliefs here and there are nothing more than sticking plasters to a system in urgent need of reform.”

The committee has heard arguments for alternatives to business rates, such as a ‘land value’ tax – a levy on the land a property exists on rather than the property itself. Another suggestion has been to have online sales levies as the system places a “disproportionate burden” on bricks-and-mortar high street shops compared to online businesses.

However, McGovern said that alternatives had not been “sufficiently modelled to examine who would be the winners and losers of any change.”

The report concluded that it should not be up to “external stakeholders” to develop and evaluate detailed proposals for a new system. Instead, the government should prepare a consultation on the business rates system by the next Spring Statement, it said. …”

Source:Public Finance (pay wall)

More flack for EDDC Leader Ingram on spending and transparency

Not looking good … now being attacked for  wanting to employ consultants to tell him what town centre problems are:

“East Devon District Council ‘lacks good detailed intelligence about its towns and their economic wellbeing’.

Cllr Ben Ingham, leader of the council, admitted: “This is not a good state of affairs,” when questioned at Wednesday night’s full council meeting.

It came after Cllr Mike Allen asked questions over the decision of the portfolio holder for economy, Cllr Kevin Blakey, to commission a major study into town centres.

Cllr Allen asked for an indication of the cost proposed and in the interests of proper transparency, for the Consultancy brief envisaged be put to the next Overview Committee for discussion before any expenditure is committed. …”

https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/east-devon-lacks-good-intelligence-3474769

EDDC Leader on car park charges … basically now a complete muddle

Leader Ben Ingham’s statement – a masterclass on how to make a bad decision worse – a rushed, piecemeal temporary fix that suits no-one and has no clear outcome.

“East Devon Scrutiny committee to set up a Task and Finish Forum to consider the ongoing future of the council’s car parks

At a meeting of East Devon District Council’s Cabinet on Wednesday 2 October, councillors discussed a report detailing proposed changes to car parking charges in East Devon and resolved to take the following steps:

That statutory advertisement and consultation procedures are actioned with a view to changing car park charges from £1 to £1.20 per hour in high demand car parks (including the London Inn, Imperial Road and Queens Drive car parks in Exmouth).

The 20p per hour increase for the high demand car parks is a rounded down inflation based increase from 2010.

To implement a 12 month trial of free coach parking in Seaton Jurassic coach park and a promotional tariff of £2 all day parking in the Canaan Way and Brook Street car parks in Ottery St. Mary

The Cabinet decision was subsequently debated at a meeting on Thursday 3 October by the council’s Scrutiny committee, which has resolved to set up a Task and Finish Forum (TAFF).

This will consider a range of matters with regard to the ongoing and future management and operation of the Council’s car parks.

There is a possibility that the Cabinet decision will also be called-in to the Scrutiny Committee but we will not know this until later next week.”

https://exmouth.nub.news/n/leader-of-east-devon-district-council-issues-statement-regarding-car-parking-tariffs

Car park charges and whelk stalls – a councillor comments

From the blog of East Devon Alliance Sidmouth Rural Councillor John Loudoun, who comments:

  • “I attended last evening’s District Council Cabinet meeting to join 23 other Councillors in voicing our opposition to the proposed increases in parching fees at some car parks and changes to the number of publicly available spaces at others.
  • In particular I was concerned about the proposals as they will detrimentally affect the car parks in Sidbury and Temple Street, as well as the Ham East, Ham West, Roxburgh and Mill Street car parks.
  • The meeting ended up in a farce as the Cabinet carried out a Dutch auction when it came to trying to agree by how much it would increase the parking fees. It was no way to run a whelk stall!”

“Last evening the District Council’s Cabinet met to consider a much-trailed report on changes to car parking arrangements and fees across East Devon. Those of us who are not Cabinet members, about 48 of us, are able to attend and make comments on any of the issues under consideration.

In total 24 non-Cabinet District Councillors spoke on this issue. Because there were so many of us wanting to speak, we were restricted to only two minutes to say what we wanted to.

Before any of us spoke we heard from two members of the public, one of who was James McClean who owns Sidmouth Pets in Temple street who made an impassioned set of arguments as to why the Temple Street car park should not be changed from a free car park to a pay and display one. James is collecting signatures, so please pop in and sign his petition.

I spoke out against the proposal to increase the price of parking in Sidmouth’s Ham East, Ham West, Roxburgh and Mill Street car parks. The proposal is to encourage drivers to use the Manor Road car park instead as it will remain at the current fee.

Not only might an increase, of, as proposed 50% mean that less people use our car parks, but this could lead to less people shopping in Sidmouth. Sidmouth and its traders don’t need this as the shops across Sidmouth and other local high streets are struggling.

It could also mean that drivers might decide to use the private car park opposite the Bedford Hotel as its closer to the town centre than the Manor Road car park is.

I also spoke against the proposal to turn Sidbury’s small free car park to one where only permit holders or residents who have paid for a reserved space can park there. This is a ridiculous proposal! The car park is well used every day and also during many evenings.

It is used to visit our two shops, our Church our Village Hall, our Parish Rooms and Sidbury Primary School. Without our free car park visitors to all of these venues would be forced to clog up Ridgeway, park on the A375 making access through the village even more difficult, or park in other parts of the village where residents will be hugely inconvenienced.

Sidbury’s car park is also used by many who live in the centre of the village and who either don’t have either off road parking spaces or have space outside or nearer to their homes.

After all of the 24 non-Cabinet members had spoken the Cabinet then debated the proposals. Oh dear! This turned into a complete farce as different Cabinet members proposed various amendments to the proposals and the Leader, Ben Ingham, who was chairing the meeting, totally failed to keep control of the discussions and in so doing added to what was already a confusing Cabinet debate.

After what seemed to be forever, the Cabinet, although not by a unanimous vote supported a set of slightly amended proposals keeping the intent to increase parking fees, although by not quite as much, in all the various car parks identified. The Cabinet settled on a 20% increase in these car parks after the Leader had in effect carried out a Dutch auction with numbers appearing to be plucked out of the air.

This was no way to make decisions which include increasing parking fees. Instead of pulling the report and reviewing it in light of the total opposition of the 24 Councillors who spoke against the proposals we ended up with a set of Cabinet decisions taken through a bidding process.

This matter will not end here. The Cabinet Minutes which will record last evening’s decisions on car parking will be presented to Full Council on 23 October. Councillor’s will have the opportunity to challenge the Minute and even vote against it, thus rescinding the decisions made by Cabinet.

Members of the public too can attend the Full Council and put across their points of view on this and any other matter.

Alternatively, a Motion could come from a Councillor which calls for the car parking proposals to be scrapped. This is set to run for a while longer!

If you are interested in reading the full proposals that were discussed last evening at Cabinet follow this link –

Click to access Car%20Parking%20Tariff%20Review%20-%20Careful%20Choices.pdf

“High Street crisis: Towns lose FIFTY-five football pitches worth of retail space as shops are converted for other use”

“Fifty-five football pitches worth of retail space has been lost in just a year as the crisis on the High Street continues to take its toll.

The 4.2million sq ft of lost space in England and Wales – where shopping units have been converted for other uses – comes as shoppers continue to flock online. …”

https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-7492165/High-Street-crisis-Towns-lose-FIFTY-five-football-pitches-worth-retail-space.html?ito=rss-flipboard

“We can revive Britain’s high streets. But developers stand in the way”

“… there are just fewer and fewer drivers of footfall. You cannot get your hair cut online, so barbers – like nail bars, tattoo parlours and tanning salons – buck the downward trend. But we only need so many of these. Greggs and to-go food stores are buoyant; gyms and takeaways are the only sectors showing double-digit net growth, says PwC. But even that feels precarious. Delivery apps are driving growth in the takeaway sector but, if in-person purchases fall, these could quickly migrate to so-called dark kitchens on industrial estates.

“The reality is we may need fewer high streets in the future,” says a PwC spokesperson. “This opens opportunities to repurpose high street space, while [evolving] to meet consumer demand.”

But what will that look like? In 2011 Mary Portas, retail expert and Cameron-era government consultant, lobbied for an anti-clone-town drive to remodel high streets around independent shops. But bar a few niche fashion, gift or record shops, supermarkets marched relentlessly on. The butcher, baker and candlestick-maker now work in Tesco.

Consequently councils and property developers increasingly want to use food and drink to seed regeneration, many inspired by Altrincham’s Market House. In 2010, 30% of Altrincham’s shops lay empty. In 2014, the Market House opened – a communal dining hall of independent kitchens attached to a speciality market – and, since then, a remarkable ecology of bars, restaurants and coffee shops has evolved around it. Footfall has risen sharply, shop vacancy rates have fallen to 9.7% and brands such as JD Sports and Nando’s have moved into the town’s once-failing shopping area.

Market House’s operator, Nick Johnson, a former board member at property company Urban Splash, claims for the £635,000 it cost (£435,000 came from Trafford council, Johnson contributed the rest) : “It has probably delivered the greatest regeneration outputs of any project in 25 years.”

Little wonder councils love the idea: it allows them to cost-effectively reinvent one of the few central sites they still own, the market.

There are similar schemes in development countrywide. But it will be tough to repeat Altrincham’s success. First, it is a relatively affluent Greater Manchester town bordering Cheshire; and second, Johnson’s unorthodox curation of some exceptional foodie talent (like the artists on his friend Tony Wilson’s Factory records, none of the Altrincham traders have signed contracts) has provided an X factor that councils and developers will find hard to mimic.

There is also something about both the Portas and Altrincham models of handmade, artisan-roasted regeneration that, at their most crude, feel a bit myopically middle class. Mishandled, it can create silos of gentrification that alienate residents. Craft markets are great, but where does your nana buy a new washing line?

If town centres are to shrink and be redrawn, surely the ideal would be to intermingle viable businesses that attract different kinds of customers (in age and socioeconomic status), much as Trafford’s Stretford Mall is trying to blend hip new businesses into its established tenant mix. That fosters social cohesion but, commercially, there is strength in numbers, too – in making it easy to shop at Quality Save and Boots, Greggs and Stretford’s new Food Hall canteen, as mood or budget permits.

Not that this future should always have a commercial imperative. As town centres empty, there is a generational opportunity to reverse the gross monetisation of our public realm. This is a chance to make the principles of placemaking – creating inclusive public spaces where people can enjoy their leisure time without spending money – a reality. Nonprofit arts and cultural organisations forced out by high rents could, likewise, come back into empty shop units (long-term, not as a temporary gesture by developers), to re-engage local people with these spaces – and without it costing them £6 a pint.

But will any of this happen? The short answer is no. Councils do not have the money or the compulsory-purchase powers to radically intervene. Enlightened developers are rare. The patchwork of smaller private landlords who own peripheral space in town centres need to fill their properties, hence the fact that cool cottage industries tend to flourish there, in pockets. But the remote coalition of global property management, pension and investment funds that owns most shopping precincts or malls is, at best, distantly concerned with the local population.

Even if the retail property market crashes (in January, the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors warned unusually of “potential for significant changes in value”), such owners will consolidate, sell property, bulldoze it and redevelop, and if shopping centres can limp on, they will. Under new permitted development rights, closed high street retail units can now easily be turned into residential property.

Where will those new residents congregate? High streets may yet be reborn as the genuine heart of their communities, protected from commercial pressure, but don’t bet on it – and certainly not online.”

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/sep/14/britain-high-streets-developers-footfall?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

“Historic High Street funding winners named”

The south-west, as usual, gets least funding, and, of course, Cranbrook, with no town centre at all, is NOT historic!

“Historic English shopping centres will benefit from a £95m regeneration fund, the government has said.

In all, 69 towns and cities will receive money, with projects aimed at turning disused buildings into shops, houses and community centres.

The largest share of money, £21.1m, will go to the Midlands, with £2m going to restore buildings in Coventry that survived World War Two bombing.

The government said the move would “breathe new life” into High Streets.

The government’s Future High Street Fund is providing £52m of the money, while £40m will come from the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS). A further £3m is being provided by the National Lottery Heritage Fund.

Towns and cities had to bid for the £95m funding, which was first announced in May.

The announcement comes after figures showed that about 16 shops a day closed in the first half of the year as retailers restructure their businesses and more shopping moves online.

Lisa Hooker, consumer markets leader at PwC which was behind the research, said retailers had to invest more in making stores “relevant to today’s consumers”, but added that “new and different types of operators” needed encouragement to fill vacant space.

‘Wider regeneration’

The government said the money would “support wider regeneration” in the 69 successful areas by attracting future commercial investment.

“Our nation’s heritage is one of our great calling cards to the world, attracting millions of visitors to beautiful historic buildings that sit at the heart of our communities,” said Culture Secretary Nicky Morgan.

“It is right that we ensure these buildings are preserved for future generations but it is important that we make them work for the modern world.”

Other major projects include a £2m drive to restore historic shop-fronts in London’s Tottenham area, which suffered extensive damage in the 2011 riots.

By region, the funding breaks down as follows:

London and the South East: £14.3m
South West: £13.7m
Midlands: £21.1m
North East and Yorkshire: £17.2m
North West: £18.7m

You can read a full list of the towns and cities that will benefit here

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-49692091

but for south-west:

Chard
Cullompton
Gloucester
Keynsham
Midsomer Norton
Plymouth
Poole
Redruth
Tewkesbury
Weston-Super-Mare

“Increasing competition from online outlets is putting High Streets across the country under growing pressure,” said the DCMS.

“As part of the government’s drive to help High Streets adapt to changing consumer habits, the £95m funding will provide a welcome boost.”

Responding to the move, shadow culture secretary Tom Watson said High Streets had been “decimated” by “a decade of Tory austerity”.

He added: “This funding pales in comparison to the £1bn Cultural Capital fund that Labour is committed to, which will boost investment in culture, arts and heritage right across the country, not just a few lucky areas.”

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-49692090

“One in 10 shops now empty as number reaches four-year high”

“The number of empty shops in town centres has reached its highest level since 2015, figures have shown.

The national vacancy rate was 10.3% in July, the highest since January 2015, according to the BRC (British Retail Consortium)-Springboard footfall and vacancies monitor.

Footfall also fell by 1.9% last month, marking the worst decline for July since 2012.

Helen Dickinson, chief executive of the BRC, said retailers had faced a “challenging environment”.

“High streets and town centres play an important part in our local communities, and we should be concerned by the rise in empty store fronts,” she said.

The figures showed that high street footfall declined by 2.7% last month, while footfall at shopping centres fell by 3.1%. …”

https://www.devonlive.com/news/uk-world-news/one-10-shops-now-empty-3199745

Midweek Herald asks: where IS Cranbrook town centre?

Good question!

https://www.midweekherald.co.uk/news/cranbrook-town-centre-investigation-part-one-1-6175614

Made all the more relevant by Exeter City Council refusing ALL THREE applications for out-of-town developments aroundHoniton Road last night,citing, in part, the need not to stand in the way of the development of a town centre in Cranbrook.

High Street trading German-style

James Timpson, chief executive of Timpson Group:

“I have just got back from Germany, where I’ve been looking for ideas to bring back to Timpson shops in this country. Germany is a good source of inspiration because the weather there is similar to ours — it rains a lot. And rain is good for cobblers. The more it rains, the more shoes wear out. If we were to open in Dubai, I doubt we would do well.

The German retail scene is different from what I see when I travel around Britain, visiting more than 1,000 of our shops each year. There were hardly any vacant sites over there, no closing-down sales — and the high streets and shopping centres were busy. I’m sure the landlords are also doing well.

The Germans are just behind us in the amount they buy online, and they have many of the same brands as our high streets. The problem in Britain is that we have way too many shops — far more than in Germany.

My company rents 95% of its shops from landlords whose aim is to get us to pay the highest rent possible. My fantastic property team battle to find evidence to prove that rents should be lower. We were on the losing side of this cat-and-mouse game for years after I joined the business in 1995. In the past four years, however, the tide has turned.

In the 40 lease renewals we have completed in the past three months, the rents have come down by an average 9.6% — and that doesn’t take into account the generous rent-free periods we’ve also pocketed. There are some shops where the rents have come down by 80%, and more than a dozen where we pay no rent at all.

You will find many retailers complaining about high rents, but you will find even more complaining about high business rates.

When I became chief executive, in 2002, I started a discipline I still abide by today, and still hate doing just as much. I go through the profit-and-loss accounts for every one of our 2,100 shops every month, looking for errors and bad performance. While I’m no accountant, it’s amazing what you can learn.

The biggest change over this time has been how much the rates bill — the amount we pay local authorities as a property tax — has gone up (business rates brought in £25bn for the government in England last year).

The rule of thumb used to be that rates made up 30% of the rent. The figure is now 44% and growing. You can see why many retailers find this difficult to afford and difficult to understand. With online shopping growing, more out-of-town retail parks popping up and consumer sentiment weak, retailers are closing shops at an alarming rate.

However, I don’t think rates are the real problem — it’s rents.

Rates are based on the value of the property. If that goes up, the rates go up. It can take some time for the figure to reflect the true value of the building — and years to be adjusted to a fair level. The lag is the problem.

The Louis Vuitton shop on London’s Bond Street saw its annual rates bill soar from £3.9m to £8.5m a couple of years ago — up 118%. The nearby Chanel shop suffered a 135% increase. The rents rose so steeply because the value of the buildings they trade from had also gone up dramatically. These prized assets come with big bills.

Because of the lag in assessing what each property is worth, many in my chain have been overpaying rates for some years. In essence, Timpson shops in less glamorous locations have been subsidising global designer brands such as Chanel. While we never look for pity, we do like to play a fair game.

Now, on to rents. As they come down, we are seeing a drop in the rates we pay. Landlords are becoming more astute in recognising that it’s often better to take a reduced rent than to receive no rent at all and be forced to pick up an “empty rates” bill on top. This process takes years to unwind — up to 10. Most leases we sign run for 10 years, with a break clause at five. Only at these two points can we challenge the landlord to get the rent down. We still don’t win them all — the rent in Nantwich went up last week!

So retailers shouldn’t worry about the rates, which they can’t control, and concentrate instead on battling with landlords to get the lowest possible rent. This will, in time, lead to lower rates.

I’m proud of the amount we pay in rates (£8.6m last year, against a rent bill of £19.3m). This money pays for our customers to drive on roads to get to the shops, for our sick colleagues to go to hospital, and for schools to educate our children.

While we may not like paying too much, our rates go a long way to help the communities who shop with us. Other retailers should think the same way.”

Source:Sunday Times (pay wall)

Small businesses accuse government of failing them

“Theresa May’s Government today stands accused of failing to back small businesses, in a report due to be launched by Home Secretary Sajid Javid.

A damning poll reveals three in five people think the Tories are letting down the army of small firms which are vital to the economy and town centres.

The findings come from a YouGov survey of 1,644 adults for the Centre for Policy Studies think tank, which was founded by Margaret Thatcher.

It revealed 60% of people believed the Government “is not on the side of small business”, with just 14% disagreeing. …

This report shows how bureaucracy and paperwork are stifling the growth of our small businesses and offers a series of compelling ideas for how Government can roll back the tide and show that the Conservatives are backing entrepreneurs.”

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/small-businesses-damning-verdict-nine-16052199

Be sceptical about pre-election rumours!

Ask yourself – who would start such “good news” rumours just before local elections!

“A pair of retail giants has quashed rumours of setting up shop in Sidmouth.

Both Marks and Spencers and Superdrug have ruled out any plans to set up a food hall or beauty store at this time.

With a number of buildings available for new businesses in the town, there has been talk that both companies may have had their eyes on coming to Sidmouth. …”

https://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/m-s-and-superdrug-not-coming-to-sidmouth-1-6024390

Cranbrook urgently needs temporary GP practice

Owl is amused at the idea that an extra GP practice would increase footfall in the “town”. But you just cannot call a settlement of 2,000 houses with 5 shops a town – maybe “suburb of Exeter” is now more appropriate!

“… Cranbrook temporary GP Practise
The Projects Director presented the report which sought approval for up to £150k of funding from the Enterprise Programme to enable the delivery of a temporary GP practice in Cranbrook town centre. This was an urgent requirement because of the lack of capacity at the current practice. Whilst Access Healthcare had had their contract extended there were significant concerns over the ability to deliver increasing patient numbers. Expanded facilities were therefore urgently required.
Discussions included the following:

 if not supported this would create a massive health inequality
 this was a loan therefore the borrowing would be repaid
 as well as helping the health service, this was a benefit to the residents of Cranbrook as the existing provision was under pressure. …

The current GP practice in the Younghayes Centre was at capacity. The temporary GP practice would enable the continued delivery of primary care services in Cranbrook for a period of 5 years. It would also bring increased footfall to the town centre and act as a catalyst for attracting wider investment.”

https://democracy.eastdevon.gov.uk//documents/g143/Printed%20minutes%2003rd-Apr-2019%2017.30%20Cabinet.pdf?T=1

“Stronger Towns Fund” not new money

“Theresa May’s £1.6 billion ’shameless bung’ to MPs in a bid to get them to back her Brexit deal is not new money, it has been revealed.

Much of Government’s ‘Stronger Towns Fund’ Much will be distributed to Leave-voting Labour heartlands to give communities a boost after leaving the EU.

Angry Labour MPs accused the Prime Minister of trying to woo them to back her plans ahead of this week’s failed second vote.

But the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) have confirmed it is not new money and will be met from existing departmental budgets. …”

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/theresa-mays-shameless-16m-brexit-14139714

People now shopping for “needs” not “wants”

… “Helen Dickinson OBE, chief executive of the British Retail Consortium, said: ‘While real incomes have been rising over the last year, the uncertainty surrounding Brexit appears to be driving a needs-not-wants approach to shopping…. “

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/news/article-6789495/Number-people-visiting-shops-falls-five-year-low-amid-Brexit-jitters.html

“DEPRIVED TOWNS FUND IS INSIGNIFICANT COMPARED WITH STAGGERING CUTS”

You read here that EDDC Conservatives have decided that the only town they will put forward for this (meagre)fund is Axminster. Well, good luck, Axminster!

But when voting day comes remember your councillors have alteady overspent around £3 million on their new HQ and are funding a new road at the airport for another £3 million AND setting up a £20 million property company to invest OUTSIDE East Devon.

“The Stronger Towns Fund, announced by the government yesterday, is a £1.6 billion fund to be spent between now and 2025 on places that are often referred to as ​‘left behind’.

£1.6 billion as a lump sum is not to be sniffed at, even though in government spending terms it’s relatively small beer. Share small beer out over seven years and it’s reduced to a thimble full; around £267 million total per year if spending starts in the financial year 2019/​20 and is distributed evenly until 2025/​26. Share it out further to all the places in the UK that most need government investment, training and jobs and it’s a droplet in the ocean.

If that were the beginning and end of it, then fine. ​‘Government announces small bit of funding for something that needs a bigger bit of funding’ is not much of a story. However, the government is giving with one hand, and taking much more away with the other.

The Revenue Support Grant is given to local authorities by central government and makes up around a third of councils’ budgets. Between 2018/​19 and 2019/​20, the grant is due to be cut by 37% — that’s £1.3 billion in a single year — on top of savage cuts to it that have already taken place.

From 2013/​14 to 2019/​20, even with locally retained business rates and the main government unrestricted grant, local authorities have seen their net incomes decrease by 48%. The year of Stronger Towns Funding that will presumably occur in 2019/​20 (if allocated equally over six years) compensates this loss by less than 1%. Council incomes will still have been cut by 47%. The whole Stronger Towns pot of money would reduce this loss by no more than 5% if provided in one year — which will not be the case. Of course, some regions will receive more than this and others less, but compared to the staggering cuts to local authorities, the new fund pales in comparison.

Aside from this loss of government money, post-Brexit the UK will be losing money provided by the European Union via its structural funds. Between 2014 and 2020, the UK will have received €17.2 billion for regional and social development, which has flowed significantly to many of the same areas that the Stronger Towns Fund will prioritise.

If the UK were to remain in the EU, between 2021 and 2027, €13 billion of EU structural funds would flow to poorer regions; significantly more than the Stronger Towns Fund. Some further settlement is expected from central government to compensate areas for this loss, but the amount is still unclear.

The Stronger Towns Fund has not gone down well in many of the regions, smaller cities and towns at which it will be targeted. And why should it? One cause of the economic malaise many of these places face is austerity. Reversing its effect will take more than this paltry offer. It will take a transformational approach to government investment, focused both on rebalancing the economy and restoring basic public services that are often the lifeblood of communities.

Many, including opposition politicians, have suggested that the Stronger Towns Fund looks like a bribe to persuade Labour MPs in leave-voting constituencies in particular to support the government’s Withdrawal Agreement. If so, the chances are it will have the opposite effect. …”

https://neweconomics.org/2019/03/deprived-towns-fund-is-insignificant-compared-with-staggering-cuts

Only Axminster chosen for cash for ailing High Streets

Bet it won’t only be Cranbrook with its non-High Street (currently only 5 shops for the growing town) that will be miffed but also Seaton, where the Tesco superstore has sucked the life out of its High Street!

“Axminster will be put forward as the East Devon town to try and grab a share of a £675m fund to ‘help failing High Streets’ – ahead of Cranbrook.

East Devon District Council’s cabinet on Wednesday night agreed to submit a bid for Axminster to the Government’s Future High Streets Fund.

The Future High Street Fund has been set up to help address the significant structural changes that are currently having an impact on towns and high streets throughout the UK. …”

https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/councillors-choose-axminster-over-cranbrook-2619176